Hall v. Malone
104 So. 3d 593
La. Ct. App.2012Background
- Southern Scrap appeals the trial court's grant of summary judgment for Labor Ready on contractual defense/indemnity claims.
- Underlying tort: Hall, a plaintiff, was injured in a December 22, 2007 accident while a guest in a Southern Scrap vehicle driven by Judy on Southern Scrap's premises.
- Malone pursued a third-party demand against Judy and Southern Scrap seeking defense/indemnity under an indemnification agreement with Malone.
- Southern Scrap sought defense/indemnity from Labor Ready under a 1997 Temporary Personnel Supply Agreement between Labor Ready and Resource Recycling, claiming affiliate status.
- Labor Ready argued the 1997 Agreement did not cover Hall's staffing of Southern Scrap in 2007 and did not inure to Southern Scrap; Work Ticket contracts did not create the claimed obligation; the 1997 Agreement did not obligate Labor Ready in this matter.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Labor Ready on two grounds: the 1997 Agreement did not apply and Southern Scrap was not an affiliate; and even if indemnification could apply, Hall’s injuries did not arise from Labor Ready’s acts under the Agreement. The court denied Southern Scrap's motion for new trial, and the appellate court affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 1997 Agreement obligates Labor Ready to defend/indemnify Southern Scrap. | Southern Scrap seeks defense/indemnity as an affiliate under the 1997 Agreement. | The 1997 Agreement does not cover the 2007 staffing or provide for Southern Scrap's indemnity. | No; the 1997 Agreement does not impose such duties. |
| Whether Southern Scrap is entitled to indemnity despite lack of nexus between the accident and the Agreement. | Indemnification should apply based on arranging for temporary workers. | Indemnity requires breach or acts in performance or work to be performed; here none apply. | Indemnity not triggered by the accident facts. |
| Whether Southern Scrap is an affiliate entitled to benefits under the 1997 Agreement. | Affiliation through Resource Recycling affords indemnity. | The contract language limits benefits to specified affiliates; Southern Scrap not within scope. | Not entitled under the 1997 Agreement. |
Key Cases Cited
- Klutz v. New Orleans Public Facility Management, Inc., 921 So.2d 1021 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2005) (indemnity language governs obligations and burden of proof remains on claimant)
- Kinsinger v. Taco Tico, Inc., 861 So.2d 669 (La. App. 5 Cir. 2003) (indemnity agreements strictly construed; burden on proponent)
- Robin v. Wong, 971 So.2d 386 (La. App. 4 Cir. 2007) (indemnity agreements interpreted as contracts; burden on enforcing party)
- Meloy v. Conoco, Inc., 504 So.2d 833 (La. 1987) (indemnity as a specialized contract; interpretation as law)